With just a day to go until Apple's much anticipated media event, tablet rumors continue to swell, with reports of TV networks balking at Apple's proposed subscription plan, and claims of Verizon employees preparing for a "big day" Wednesday.

TV execs oppose Apple subscriptions, $0.99 pricing

According to The New York Times, a number of TV companies were not interested in Apple's pitch for an all-you-can-eat subscription plan. Last year, Apple allegedly pitched a $30-a-month iTunes TV subscription plan, and while one report alleged that CBS and Disney showed interest, some other major networks have not.

"Perhaps smarting from their experiences with Apple, many of the old-line media companies NBC Universal, Viacom and Discovery among them shrugged at (or totally dismissed) Apples plans for a TV subscription package, according to executives briefed on the talks," the report said. "A person briefed on Apples plans confirmed that such a subscription video option was not part of any immediate offering."

But another report has alleged that Apple could have a backup plan, with 99 cent TV show purchases. The Financial Times has claimed that Apple is pushing studios to halve the cost of TV episodes. Currently, shows typically cost $1.99 per episode, but Apple would reportedly like to see the price match that of most songs available on the iTunes store. That report also suggested there has been resistance from the content owners.

"However, networks are resisting the move as they fear a repeat of the music industry's pact with Apple in 2003 to sell individual songs for 99 cents on iTunes," the report said. "The price helped to simplify and boost downloads of digital music but dented album sales."

Previous reports alleged that Apple was looking to offer TV subscriptions as a new iTunes product that could be utilized with the forthcoming tablet. The New York Times report this week again linked the proposal to the tablet, and the Financial Times said the 99 cent pricing plan is an "integral part" of the tablet strategy.

NBC's alleged rejection comes as no surprise, as cable provider Comcast reached an agreement last year to buy the network. Many believe a Comcast-owned NBC would be unlikely to participate in an iTunes subscription plan, because it would be detrimental to cable subscriptions.

The New York Times also noted that its parent company is developing a version of its newspaper for Apple's tablet, and many other print publications have been rumored in talks for months. The report quoted an anonymous person who has seen the tablet as saying that Apple co-founder Steve Jobs believes in old media companies.

"He believes democracy is hinged on a free press and that depends on there being a professional press," the source said.

As has been previously rumored, the report also noted that the tablet will offer persistent 3G data connections and will run "all" applications available for the iPhone and iPod touch.

Apple has scheduled an event to introduce its "latest creation" at 10 a.m. Pacific time Wednesday. The event will be held at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco.

Verizon announcement coming?

Another rumor this week alleged that Verizon Wireless has told its store managers that Wednesday will be a "big day." Boy Genius Report cited an anonymous source as stating the nation's largest wireless provider will hold a "kick off" event this Wednesday, centered around a live Web cast at 1 p.m. Eastern time -- the same time as Apple's event.

The source did not provide any specific details on Apple, but the timing of the event led the Web site to call it a "solid Apple/Verizon connection."

Last week, a report alleged that both Verizon and AT&T are in 11th hour talks to offer connectivity for CDMA and GSM versions of the tablet. There has also been speculation that Apple could announce a Verizon-compatible iPhone at Wednesday's event.

It's just the natural evolution, Apple has outgrown the one carrier and now needs more.

If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept. Also locking it to the App Store will put off a lot of traditional computer users used to having control over their machines.

Is anybody surprised by the short sightedness of the TV execs? Greedy and stupid as usual. If they won't give me a legal subscription option, I'll continue on with my own "subscription" option which I've created via torrents and rapidshare. I get the benefits of no commercials and the price is nice.

Stupid execs pass up the opportunity to earn a few bucks...instead they'll get zero from most people like me.

Is anybody surprised by the short sightedness of the TV execs? Greedy and stupid as usual. If they won't give me a legal subscription option, I'll continue on with my own "subscription" option which I've created via torrents and rapidshare. I get the benefits of no commercials and the price is nice.

Stupid execs pass up the opportunity to earn a few bucks...instead they'll get zero from most people like me.

I cant say Im surprised, per say, but on the surface they do appear to be making a mistake. I dont think they get that much per user through a cable company.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

It's just the natural evolution, Apple has outgrown the one carrier and now needs more.

If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept. Also locking it to the App Store will put off a lot of traditional computer users used to having control over their machines.

Mac's have always been very secure, I don't know why we have to chose to break our security to get control of our machines returned. Sure it's the carriers that are demanding complete control to prevent abuse of their network, but that's not stopping the jail breaking or the abuse, rather it's limiting what good users choices are to the App Store.

Is anybody surprised by the short sightedness of the TV execs? Greedy and stupid as usual. If they won't give me a legal subscription option, I'll continue on with my own "subscription" option which I've created via torrents and rapidshare. I get the benefits of no commercials and the price is nice.

Stupid execs pass up the opportunity to earn a few bucks...instead they'll get zero from most people like me.

If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept.

I completely agree. I, for one, don't need or want another monthly bill. I'd be perfectly content using the tablet via WiFi. Everywhere I'd need or want to use the tablet has WiFi. That's not to say it shouldn't have a 3G option however. I just think it should be optional. Unless, they can add it to my existing AT&T data contract for another $10-$15 month max. But even then, I'd be paying for something I don't really need.

... If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept. Also locking it to the App Store will put off a lot of traditional computer users used to having control over their machines. ...

I would say you are understating the first item and overstating the second.

If the tablet *requires* a cell contract, it will be criticised roundly and might not take off at all. The necessity for an expensive contract will most definitely drive down sales.

On the other hand, the idea that there are millions that hate Apples's "closed" App store, and that this would put them off buying a device that uses it is primarily a fantasy. People gripe a lot about it, but it hasn't affected sales yet.

I was with Cingular/AT&T for eight years and I simply got tired of their poor Customer Service. So, I dropped them, went over to Verizon and received their version of the Razr. I was amazed at the horrible software that Verizon uses in their phones. After nearly two years with them, I went back to AT&T and bought an iPhone. Now that a Verizon iPhone seems eminent, I cannot imagine what the software will look like. Although, I'm sure that Verizon will find a way to screw it up.

The broadcast model is ending. CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox failed to embrace cable/satelite. Now they are failing to embrace Content on demand.

And they will reap the same harvest as the recording industry.

I dont know if Hulu is profitable, but it sure seems successful in viewership. I know I use that, even in their low-bitrate
480p, over torrenting a show I miss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcphoto

I was with Cingular/AT&T for eight years and I simply got tired of their poor Customer Service. So, I dropped them, went over to Verizon and received their version of the Razr. I was amazed at the horrible software that Verizon uses in their phones. After nearly two years with them, I went back to AT&T and bought an iPhone. Now that a Verizon iPhone seems eminent, I cannot imagine what the software will look like. Although, I'm sure that Verizon will find a way to screw it up.

Since the iPhone emerged on AT&T and siphoned off a fair amount or premium customers from Verizon they have changed their ways. If we see the iPhone on Verizon I would expect it to be as feature rich and unhindered as the AT&T iPhone, sans the limitations of EV-DO Rev. A over HSPA.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I'm betting that the Tablet will feature the new dual-band CDMA/GSM chips. Seeing as how the Tablet will be a world product (the world is heavily GSM), and the rumors of Verizon gearing up for a big day Wednesday, I don't see how it could be any other way. You'll have your choice of signing up with either AT&T or Verizon for coverage. I also bet that Jobs will announce that the iPhone will sport the same dual band chip as well, for the revision coming this summer. Verizon (and all its customers) I'm sure must be excited. I, for one, would gladly switch back.

As a shareholder, I'm glad AAPL is expanding the distribution to potentially Verizon. Their network seems superior across the US. But I would just hate to give up the ability to have data while on a call. Thankfully in CT / New England, ATT is quite good and won't force me to switch.

It's just the natural evolution, Apple has outgrown the one carrier and now needs more.

If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept. Also locking it to the App Store will put off a lot of traditional computer users used to having control over their machines.

Mac's have always been very secure, I don't know why we have to chose to break our security by jail breaking it in order to get control of our machines returned. Sure it's the carriers that are demanding complete control to prevent abuse of their network, but that's not stopping the jail breaking or the abuse, rather it's limiting what good users choices are to the App Store.

Also a locked machine doesn't allow one to run proprietary software that a company doesn't want spread out on the App Store to the public.

Laptops can get 3G USB drives and run any software they want, even abuse the network if they want to risk disconnection. So I don't see why a cell enabled Tablet device should be locked to the App Store.

I just hope none of these horrors come true and Apple has addressed these concerns, that's all.

While anything is possible, Trip, until Apple makes it official, I seriously doubt that Apple would make such an error in judgement, without offering options. By traditional computer users I think you have offered a euphemism for geek. The vast majority of the millions using the iPhone are using as-is, locked into the App Store, blissfully unaware that there are troubled geeks who insist on jail-breaking to gain that ephemeral control they so ardently desire. It wasn't the carriers demanding complete control - it was Apple. As a new product line Apple needed to ensure the user experience for the vast majority was consistently good on the iPhone, out of the box. And rightly so. And they haven't necessarily gone out of their way to prevent jail-breaking, but neither have they gone out of their way to avoid bricking a jail-broken iPhone. I also don't get how on one hand you can comment previously that over 100,00 apps are "too many" (especially those darn fart apps) and then turn around here and claim that there aren't enough good user choices among that 100,000+.

As far as spreading proprietary software via the App Store, you do realize that the App Store has proprietary areas that are limited to corporate or proprietary function only, right? And finally this device isn't a laptop or even "just" a tablet, it will be a uniquely Apple concept which may in fact not be "geek-worthy". In other words, it'll be cool and attractive to a vast majority consumers, but just not right for us geeks. Sux to be us sometimes, but if we demand full control and minimal interference then we can't expect our little minority to directly impact Apple's plans for a rich, controlled consumer experience.

So because Jobs believes he himself has to save the freedom of the press we are all supposed to spend 600 to 1000 dollars on a tablet? He better have more than this.

Gotta love how you spin things in such a negative way. How about first watching or reading about the special event then (and this crazy) deciding whether a new product fits your needs instead of making of silly accusations that Jobs thinks of himself as some sort of Martin Luther King Jr. of the publishing industry and that he expects all to buy the new product. Even while reading it Its really hard to believe that people can complain about something that doesnt yet exist. Seriously, whats the benefit of kicking Schrödinger's cat?

Quote:

Originally Posted by iReality85

I'm betting that the Tablet will feature the new dual-band CDMA/GSM chips. Seeing as how the Tablet will be a world product (the world is heavily GSM), and the rumors of Verizon gearing up for a big day Wednesday, I don't see how it could be any other way. You'll have your choice of signing up with either AT&T or Verizon for coverage. I also bet that Jobs will announce that the iPhone will sport the same dual band chip as well, for the revision coming this summer. Verizon (and all its customers) I'm sure must be excited. I, for one, would gladly switch back.

I sure hope not, because I dont want to pay for HW and the licensing fees that Im not going to use.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

If the Tablet requires a (another) cell phone contract, it's going to be very painful for a lot of folks to accept. Also locking it to the App Store will put off a lot of traditional computer users used to having control over their machines.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob55

I completely agree. I, for one, don't need or want another monthly bill. I'd be perfectly content using the tablet via WiFi. Everywhere I'd need or want to use the tablet has WiFi. That's not to say it shouldn't have a 3G option however. I just think it should be optional. Unless, they can add it to my existing AT&T data contract for another $10-$15 month max. But even then, I'd be paying for something I don't really need.

Verizon offers FIOS and cable services, remember. They might work out an agreement with Apple to possibly include Tablet coverage in your FIOS package, or an addition charge tacked onto your monthly data plan. iPhone users already pay AT&T $100 per month for unlimited everything, and I'm sure they will continue to pay. AT&T may do something similar as well. Either way, if you plan on buying and using Apple's Tablet, a bump to the cost of your monthly data plan is pretty much inevitable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcphoto

I was with Cingular/AT&T for eight years and I simply got tired of their poor Customer Service. So, I dropped them, went over to Verizon and received their version of the Razr. I was amazed at the horrible software that Verizon uses in their phones. After nearly two years with them, I went back to AT&T and bought an iPhone. Now that a Verizon iPhone seems eminent, I cannot imagine what the software will look like. Although, I'm sure that Verizon will find a way to screw it up.

I highly doubt this. If Apple is indeed bringing the iPhone to Verizon, it will be the exact same configuration as what is on AT&T. It just wouldn't happen otherwise. That means no Verizon logo on the iPhone or locked down features. If Verizon wants the iPhone, which it looks like they do, then they have to play by Apple's rules.

The Television subscription model is complicated. The TV networks rely on the cable networks for 99% of their distribution. The model is entrenched and there is a lot at stake. With net distribution they have no idea what will happen. Its unchartered territory and they must be terrified of making the wrong decision now which may come back and bite them in the tail a few years down the line. I suspect that this arena will see many changes and shakeups over the next decade. The Tunes model looks ideal from a user perspective but if the content is purchased -ad free, cable network free - then there are a lot of people cut out of the loop and they are not just going to lie down and take it.

I want all you people who do nothing but complain about AT&T to leave ASAP - please. You're slowing down my AT&T network!!

That's the best part about Verizon getting the iPhone - all the complainers can go screw w/ Verizons network and my AT&T phone will only get faster while all the Verizon 3G phones will get nothing but slower

(I had AT&T before the iPhone and have had the best experience w/ them over Sprint and Verizon, had each of them for 3 years)

I sure hope not, it's been a very profitable avenue for Apple with the iPhone, having AT&T send those high monthly bills to pad and soak us every month. I cant' see how Apple could resist the temptation.

I save $4000 over two years, (a nicely decked out MacBook Pro by the way) by opting out of the iPhone and using a traditional voice cell phone instead. I also don't have those annoyingly high AT&T bills every month, play the roll over minutes games, and still get the same AT&T service. (pay as you go is great!)

Hopefully the Tablet will have two models, like the iPhone and iPod Touch and not be locked into App Store only apps, but be a open OS that will also run App Store apps too.

The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...

Why don't the networks release an app that's $19.99 for the full season of a TV show which you can stream / download.

Cable and Satellite companies want to become the XM of broadcasting and own the content as well. Bad, Bad idea... Nobody wants to sit through commercials, or own cable boxes anymore, it's just that we have no other option at the moment.

I sure hope not, because I don’t want to pay for HW and the licensing fees that I’m not going to use.

Unfortunately, that's the way the industry is headed, so you might not be buying Apple's Tablet and future iterations of the iPhone. People today not only want to keep their numbers, but also their phones too when switching networks, especially smartphones. Combined with AT&T's network woes, and the fact that creating a CDMA-specific iPhone would be cost-ineffective for Apple, the dual-band chip seems the most likely route for Apple to go.

Gotta love how you spin things in such a negative way. How about first watching or reading about the special event then (and this crazy) deciding whether a new product fits your needs instead of making of silly accusations that Jobs thinks of himself as some sort of Martin Luther King Jr. of the publishing industry and that he expects all to buy the new product. Even while reading it Its really hard to believe that people can complain about something that doesnt yet exist. Seriously, whats the benefit of kicking Schrödinger's cat?

That's why I said "he better have more than this."

I can only go by the information that is coming out... if it's wrong or incomplete it's wrong or incomplete. If it's right then this whole thing is a bad joke.

The fact we aren't hearing any leaks explaining the value of the tablet thus far is making me believe these quotes from others are accurate though.

I still don't get the talk of these iPhone Apps running on the tablet. The iPhone interface is designed with the phone, one-hand etc. in mind. This tablet will demand new Apps from the ground up, just for it. And what's more it makes monetary sense for Apple (and for its devs) to demand "new tablet-specific apps" for the  Tablet. Wait and you see, there be no mention of iPhone apps running on the tablet.

...Either way, if you plan on buying and using Apple's Tablet, a bump to the cost of your monthly data plan is pretty much inevitable.

I'm not convinced this would be the case. If anything, like others have said, it would (or should) be optional. I know others do, but I don't travel much or commute via train or bus. Since there is WiFi service everywhere I would use the tablet, the 3G aspect would be completely unnecessary to me. Also, like others have said, making some sort of data plan a requirement for the tablet would be a mistake and hurt sales.

Compatibility: All Existing iPhone/Touch apps (scaled as required) with a slew of new apps (innovative e-reading being the focus) designed specifically for the iPAD and its new capabilities/resolution.

Connectivity: 3g featured on the Verizon Network, but optional tethering for existing AT&T iPhone users.

Additionally: Absolutely NO OSX application compatibility, but will come with Apple Mobile OS versions of iLife and iWorks.

I still don't get the talk of these iPhone Apps running on the tablet. The iPhone interface is designed with the phone, one-hand etc. in mind. This tablet will demand new Apps from the ground up, just for it. And what's more it makes monetary sense for Apple (and for its devs) to demand "new tablet-specific apps" for the  Tablet. Wait and you see, there be no mention of iPhone apps running on the tablet.

I believe the tablet will run (a version of) the iphone / touch OS and as such it may be able to run most of the iphone apps. A great selling point on launch day if that is the case. I am sure most developers are scrambling to re-design their apps to work 'natively' on the tablet, however. The whole app thing will go nuts. How many app do you think will be available by the time the thing goes on sale? This is a huge issue because to a large degree the success of the tablet is dependent on the apps. The iPhone is great but the apps are what makes it amazing. And keeps making it a little more amazing each time we discover a new app.

The broadcast model is ending. CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox failed to embrace cable/satelite. Now they are failing to embrace Content on demand.

And they will reap the same harvest as the recording industry.

I disagree to a certain extent. The big 4 won't ever die since they own most of the cable channels. They will, however, suffer the same fate as the major music labels. Their content will get even more pirated, like music, until they learn not to screw the people over.

If I was Apple I would continue to go after this subscription deal with CBS & Disney and try to lock up the paid channels, news channels and PBS. NBC and Fox can go screw themselves. Rupert Murdoch is living in the past and the Comcast/NBC Universal deal should have never been allowed to go through. NBC can't even get the Tonight Show right.

BTW, why is there no mention of Apple going after a Netflix model for movies?

Is anybody surprised by the short sightedness of the TV execs? Greedy and stupid as usual. If they won't give me a legal subscription option, I'll continue on with my own "subscription" option which I've created via torrents and rapidshare. I get the benefits of no commercials and the price is nice.

Stupid execs pass up the opportunity to earn a few bucks...instead they'll get zero from most people like me.

I am. It like they don't want ANOTHER source of income. It's not like people will stop watching tv. I have plasma for a reason NBC! Not to watch your network. Nothing left to watch now that Co Co is gone

CBS is the king of broadcast television and they sound like they're on board. Apple and CBS will show them how it's supposed to be done. Just like the iPod all over again.

I believe the tablet will run (a version of) the iphone / touch OS and as such it may be able to run most of the iphone apps. A great selling point on launch day if that is the case. I am sure most developers are scrambling to re-design their apps to work 'natively' on the tablet, however. The whole app thing will go nuts. How many app do you think will be available by the time the thing goes on sale? This is a huge issue because to a large degree the success of the tablet is dependent on the apps. The iPhone is great but the apps are what makes it amazing. And keeps making it a little more amazing each time we discover a new app.

[CENTER]Hmmm?

You are aware that the iPhone did not originally feature apps compatibility/an app store yet was still considered pretty 'amazing' by many?

Apple's app infrastructure is already in place, so I really don't consider a lack of apps at launch to be a factor in the success of the iPAD, as they will come very quickly.[/CENTER]

I hope its a big day for verizon.. they are my carrier and fantastic in my area. Can't wait!

It would make more sense for Verizon's data-or-voice-only type network for the launching to be about the impending Apple tablet device rather than the iPhone.

As many have posted here and elsewhere, it's just not (yet) technically feasible for their launch to be about the iPhone: the Qualcomm chip that would enable a hybrid iPhone to use their network is not available yet, and Verizon's aggressive advertising against AT&T and the iPhone last Summer appear to doubly rule out the possibility.